From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
To: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Rameshwar Sahu <sahu.rameshwar73@gmail.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: mvsas: Replace pci_pool_alloc by pci_pool_zalloc
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 20:52:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq1oa0fe0pt.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFqt6zZLJyDJzwQZ6U3T9XG2JwQEOrEQEMYL0yLrbOnjH=yO_A@mail.gmail.com> (Souptick Joarder's message of "Mon, 12 Dec 2016 10:14:29 +0530")
>>>>> "Souptick" == Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> writes:
Souptick,
Sorry about the delay. Been out for a few days.
>>> Inside mvs_task_prep(), pci_pool_alloc() followed by memset will be
>>> replaced by pci_pool_zalloc()
Souptick> Any further comment on this ?
I took one of your other patches because the driver maintainer acked it,
thus assuming responsibility for testing it and fixing any regressions
it may cause.
The failure rate on these "trivial" patches to old and unmaintained
drivers is very high. And since you are not fixing any bugs and your
change is functionally identical what the code already does, why would
we merge it and risk a regression? (for changes like this, a Tested-by:
from somebody with actual hardware is worth a thousand Reviewed-by:
tags).
Also, I'm not really convinced that this constant churn of new and
"improved" kernel interface helper functions is really solving anything.
Quite the contrary. Real bug fixes for drivers adopting the
pci_pool_zalloc() interface will now potentially be harder to backport
to stable releases predating 4.4 or whenever that call was introduced.
So in summary, I don't see any actual benefits to your proposed
change. It's probably fine, but why would I risk merging it?
Hope that all makes sense...
Thanks!
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-14 1:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-28 11:26 [PATCH] scsi: mvsas: Replace pci_pool_alloc by pci_pool_zalloc Souptick Joarder
2016-12-01 6:04 ` Souptick Joarder
2016-12-05 6:26 ` Souptick Joarder
2016-12-05 22:04 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-12-06 13:23 ` Souptick Joarder
2016-12-06 13:28 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-12-12 4:44 ` Souptick Joarder
2016-12-14 1:52 ` Martin K. Petersen [this message]
2016-12-15 5:09 ` Souptick Joarder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=yq1oa0fe0pt.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net \
--to=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jrdr.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sahu.rameshwar73@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.